There are no guarantees in business. On the other hand, no CEO should take wild chances or gamble with success, especially when an easy trifecta for success is attainable. Once you’ve reached the ivory tower where CEOs lives, life is smooth sailing right? Not exactly. When you were working hard to reach this plateau, you probably only had one boss. Now you may have six or 12 depending on the size of your Board. You probably had people to manage. Now, however, you inherit an executive team to help you bear the burdens of leadership that has more power and input than people you were managing. Now the stakes are higher and getting them all on the same page, may prove to be a challenge. You can bet that one or two of them wanted the CEO position and may prove to be difficult. Maybe at least one thinks you’re not the right person for the job. Others may just want to hang onto their hands or jobs, and hope you don’t come in wielding an ax. Whether you’re a new or seasoned CEO, an article in HBR provides information for the Ace up your sleeve.

The new FLSA Overtime Rule is causing quite a stir. This blog’s intent is not to lobby for or against any such rule, but more to help prepare you for its impact. If you wish a more in depth understanding of this ruling, here are three links that can help:

1. The Final Rule from the Wage and Hour Division
2. A report on the rule’s economic impact
3. SHRM’s Stand on the new rule

Obviously, this new ruling will be a disrupter (to use the newest biz buzzword) to businesses of most every size and shape. If change or elimination of this law is a target for you and your business, it will take time. While raising the overtime threshold may be a good idea, doubling it is not and many businesses will face several burdensome backlashes because of it.  In the meantime, business owners and CEOs must (stop me if you’ve heard this before) adapt to change and here are some you will be facing.

For years, pundits have been talking about how Human Resources (HR) needs to be more strategic. Today’s environment brings that into focus as never before. While that is true, the focus here, is more about being strategic with your HR. What is the difference?

Manufacturing processes are consistent and produce quality products. Manufacturing processes meet specific requirements - consistently. A recent study cited in Inc. suggests that organizations that practice specific hiring practices are more successful.

Establishing standards is the foundation of quality. Job analysis plays a big role in establishing standards. How will employees know what targets they are supposed to achieve? How will managers know when a candidate has met the right criteria in order to put the right person in the right job? How will the organization know if jobs are meeting quality standards that customers demand?

Make it standard practice to both participate in and hold job fairs on a regular basis.

In the January/February issue of HR Magazine, Josh Bersin with Deloitte, makes nine predictions of “what’s in store for HR in 2015.” This is part eight of a series of nine articles looking at each of these predictions.

While HR is all about keeping up with laws that change every 15 minutes, according to Josh Bersin, that’s not the case with technology. Technology, too changes seemingly every 15 minutes, and systems that are five years old are antiquated. There is no Elizabethan Tragedy here, as according to the 2013-2014 HR Systems Survey by CedarCrestone, HR is increasing spending on its outmoded technology. In fact, the report states that companies of all sizes have joined the chorus

• 49% of companies with 10,000 or more employees
• 46% of companies with between 2,500 and 10,00 employees
• 41% of companies with between 200 and 2,500 employees

Spending the money is like a cantabile melody – easy and flowing, so that is not the issue. The real dilemma is where to spend the money and today’s choices are many. Technology has the power to solve problems or at least aid in many areas.

In the January/February issue of HR Magazine, Josh Bersin with Deloitte, makes nine predictions of “what’s in store for HR in 2015.”   This is part six of a series of nine articles looking at each of these predictions.

While an old classic, this melody has a different tempo than in times past. Managing talent may have been a distant hum in the past as the workforce played a different theme. The theme used to be that workers got a job and stayed put until retirement. However, that theme is reaching a crescendo because the workforce is anything but stable today. The workforce today is much more mobile according to Bersin. We’ve all seen this to be true as both employee and company loyalties have become a requiem. In addition, the younger generation doesn’t seem to crave that gold watch.

On a different note, Bersin suggest that the reason talent management has become so important today is that “…it’s good business. High performing companies around the world have highly tenured people.” This means they have a lot of knowledge about the company, they are skilled, and they have built up productive relationships during their tenure. This is money in the bank. This is true for two reasons. Hiring new people is expensive and it may take years for them to reach the productivity level of a tenured employee. However, there is a word of caution due here.

OK, right off the bat, I’m in trouble for linking kissing and the workplace. But I’m pretty certain that blowing up HR is frowned upon as well. Lately there have been cries to dismember HR in some way, by splitting it up, blowing it up, redesigning it, or doing away with it altogether. In fact, in a report by Deloitte, there is a gap “between what business leaders want and the capabilities of HR to deliver.” The report goes on to state that even HR gives its teams a grade of C-. Business leaders rate HR with a D   I would relate the relationship between HR and leadership as that of teenagers and their parents. Here’s why.

When HR or as it was called then, personnel, was first created, it more or less had the behaviors of a child – more play than substance. Personnel at that time was more about planning parties, making everyone happy, and staying in the background. A recent article on hronline.com suggests that changes in the personnel department began with the entrance of women (you knew it would be our fault) in the workforce during WWI. Because of this, a new level of people management became necessary along with more regimented training and better organization.

The 1930s brought a dip in employment, but when WW II broke out, history repeated itself with women filing back into the workforce. Now personnel began shedding its training wheels as the previous work to better employee management was beginning to pay off. After WW II, serious changes began to evolve in the workplace. This is when discrimination began to rear its ugly head or at least began to be noticed and reported. Later health and safety landed on personnel’s desk. In the 1980s organiztions began to see people as valuable assets and the term Human Resources now launched the department into the tween years. Now leadership wants HR to grow up and take some business responsibility and HR wants to be appreciated for its to date accomplishments. As with any family disputes, there is no doubt blame, responsibility, and changes that need to be made on both sides.